I would like to experiment with fitting a turbo engine into a murena. A 2.5 litre with about 200 bhp, with potential for increasing this upto 450 bhp if the car works well. Can the experts explain to me the main differences between the chassis of the 1.6 and 2.2 cars, of course I intend to upgrade the suspension and braking systems as part of the conversion. Any advice or pointers to other conversions would be gratefully received. For information I have a very fast volvo 480 turbo running at high boost levels (and planning to go higher).

1.6 and 2.2 chassis are fairly similar. The trailingarms and their mountings to the chassis are however different, and you will need to reinforce the chassis in that area considerably to withstand so much power.

You will also need some serious cooling ducts, - a midengined car doesn't benefit from the cooling airflow as a front engined car.

Also, you might quickly run out of space in the enginebay - the Murena is a very small car. Parked next to my Peugeot 406 Coupe, it lookes like a toy car. (which it is in a way, as I love toys - but I'm sure you understand what I mean :-) )

Would the car still be a roadcar (which country would allow that?), or would it be intended for track use only ?

Thank you for the quick response, I assume the different location of the trailing arms is to alter the rear roll center hight, possibly because of the weight difference of the engine/transmission. Do you have any idea of the different roll center heights (if not I need to find two cars to take measurments and do the calculations). What are the weights of the two different engines/transmissions?

Are the front suspensions identical?

Yes, I like toys (and I have a few) and the murena will just be a fun/trackday car, with only a little road use.

Expect more questions till I get up to speed on the murena specifications.

Cheers mate!To me it sounds like, yet another Murena is about to give up its life (fins?.. Gills?) and end its days as a heavily modified track racer…I guess this would be ok had it been in “classic” or even “vintage” racing.. but that’s not what you have in mind is it?..I’m really not sure we should encourage this kind of behaviour, as Murenas really are WAY too good, and rare cars to use for this purpose.. shame on you!!

As for difference between the 1.6 and 2.2…. well the 2.2 is 50kg heavier, has better brakes, larger anti roll bars, and wider tracking. (this and the different trailing arms might accommodate a larger engine/gearbox?)To the best of my knowledge the front suspension is the same on both versionsI find it interesting, how much trouble they went through to add a modest 20-40 hp..(2.2 and 2.2s) surely they must have had much bigger ambitions for this car, as the components of the 1.6 easily holds up to this power.Just ask Lennart.. he has been running a 1.9 gti engine that’s easily 10 hp more the a standard 2.2 in his 1.6, with no problems at all.So far he hasn’t broken anything… well… except the engine itself of cause… Anyway….the standard 2.2 should be able to cope with 200 hp. (I believe the 180hp 2.2 16 valve wasn’t reinforced in anyway ?) Even 250hp doesn’t sound as too much if you use aftermarket shocks/springs and keep the rest well maintained.But this is just me guessing What ever you do, a brake upgrade is a must…. Even with light tuning and on a track car in particular, since the standard murena is fitted with solid rotors.. be it on all four wheels.Either way with the power you are considering you will need to do some serious modifications, thus its really not that big a deal if you start out with a 1.6 or a 2.2.

In the process of buying my own Murena I did some investigation into alternative engines as, to be honest,NEITHER of the old Simca engines do the rest of the car justice.I like the idea of engine swaps myself so this was my first choice in the quest for more power.My ideal candidate as a replacement would have been the Opel/Vauxhall xe20 in some form of tuned or turbo charged version.(if it's good enough for the new lotus Europa... It good enough for me! )However for practical reasons (on a road car…in Denmark) you need an engine with similar layout at the original.. (inlet in left side exhaust in the right) otherwise you would end up with the exhaust manifold right up against the fuel tank, and the exhaust having to run underneath the oil sump.

I quickly learned that unless you are ready to do some quite intrusive surgery to the car (and if you want the car to have just the slightest chance of passing inspection in Denmark), you are more or less stuck with two choices.. one for each car.The 1.6 is well suited to make use of the pug/citroen xu series engines, as they share some of the same engine mounting points. This gives you a huge range of engines to choose from, and some of witch can be tuned quite dramatically (like the one in Lennarts car….though he will probably just break it again if he does)

With the 2.2 you can’t really change to another engine at all since it has the special sump engine mount.But the turbo engine from a pug 505 is the same block as the Murena one so it is more or less a perfect match.This it the option I have went for in my on going project.. only I am building a true Murena 2.2 engine to 505 turbo specifications as I have simply been unable to source a real one.

But, this might be irrelevant since you might already have an engine in mind?..2.5?.. turbo? With lots of potential for power? Sounds like another Volvo engine to me 5 cylinder if I’m not mistaken.If so, you should be aware of the length of the engine/gearbox. The 4 cylinder 2.2 is already a very tight fit, as I’m sure anyone who has had to change the water pump will agree on… anything even slightly larger simply will not fit.Apart from that, I think Lennart is wrong… space will not be an issue.If you are to use the car as a track day racer, you will most certainly want to move the fuel tank to the front of the car!.. if not for safety then to get a better weight distribution. (Standard is roughly 40/60)And, since you will not be using it for anything practical, you have a huge boot to invade in the back.One other issue will be cooling… both water and intercooler.The radiator on the Murena is small and the very low front of the car makes it hard to improve on this. For my project I have bought a water/air intercooler as I think this is the only practical way to do this. I have seen various forms of ducting, but that is too “intrusive” for me

But all this is seen in relation to DANISH rules and regulations (witch pretty much can be be written down on one page on one word.... NO!!!!)Depending upon where you live and how much you are willing to spend, things might be alot easier..

running a converted car, I couldn't make that comment, but I do agree.

Quote

So far he hasn’t broken anything… well… except the engine itself of cause…

hmm, I'll give you a weeks quarantine if you keep reminding me ! :-)

Quote

the standard 2.2 should be able to cope with 200 hp. (I believe the 180hp 2.2 16 valve wasn’t reinforced in anyway ?)

I must admit, I don't know if the 4S prototypes were structurally reinforced. But personally I wouldn't want to send all that power through a 10mm bolt, which simply runs through a hole in the chassis. Well, two bolts in either side, but still.

Quote

some of witch can be tuned quite dramatically (like the one in Lennarts car….though he will probably just break it again if he does)

I must add that tuning wasn't the cause of my engine failure. Sadly the cause was simply lack of proper maintenance. I had overlooked that my airfilter had a large hole in it, so the engine was feeding on gravel and dirt for longer than it liked, and I paid the price.

Worth noting is that the engine is in completely standard Peugeot tune - the only thing that has been done was minor adjustments. But the interior is completely rebuilt - bearings, liners, pistons the lot.

Quote

Sounds like another Volvo engine to me 5 cylinder if I’m not mistaken.

In that case, we have seen a previous attempt run aground. Theo v/d Munckhof had a similar project going for quite some time, but last I hear from him indicated he had abandonned the project (or at least started another).

Apart from that, I think Lennart is wrong… space will not be an issue.

I was thinking of ways to cool such a thing, - but if one is prepared to move the fueltank, and even cut through the boot-wall (which is quite structural) then space will of course be less of a problem. Torsional rigidity may however suffer.

Next Murena will be killed Gizmo - please be so kind and buy Pontiac Fiero or something other than Murena, and place there 7,3 big block engine with compressor... You will have beautifull next toy. But PLEASE don't damage next Murena. How much pieces of Murena survived? Lot of them was crashed, lot of them damaged by tuning, lot of them was taken to parts... so why one of this rest have to be "modified"?

Even though we might disagree about modifications, I am with Michaltalbot on this one. I do not agree with taking a 25 year old classic sportscar and using it for glorified banger racing. This will kill the car.

Even though we might disagree about modifications, I am with Michaltalbot on this one. I do not agree with taking a 25 year old classic sportscar and using it for glorified banger racing. This will kill the car.

Thanks for all your 'helpful' suggestions and before you banish me from the forum let me say a few words in my defense

Firstly the two cars I have in mind are both basket cases canibalised and consigned to the scrap heap by 'loyal' murena owners. Rather than killing the car (or cars) I am saving them. Maybe you have even bought bits from these cars adding to their destruction !!

Secondly I love the murena concept and most of it's execution, I have driven few cars that inspire such confidence when driven hard.

The engine is a 4 cylinder (peugeot/citroen derived block) and the brakes/suspension will be upgraded within the design package of the original.

The body will only have subtle alterations to correct adverse lift problems and WILL NOT look like a batmobile.

I will however alter the dashboard and the body rubber mouldings as I fell that both these items were the the result of production cost cutting.

In short I hope to produce a car that the murena would have become had it stayed in production.

Even though we might disagree about modifications, I am with Michaltalbot on this one. I do not agree with taking a 25 year old classic sportscar and using it for glorified banger racing. This will kill the car.

I don't intend to use the car for 'banger racing' but trackdays are the ONLY safe place to explore and enjoy the limits af a cars handling.

The car will be used on the road but as I have other cars this use will be occasional (maybe 1500 km per year).

Please don't condemn me or the car till you see it finished, I am a genuine classic sports car enthusiast and have been since my very first car, an Austin Healey Sprite which I bought in 1968.

Gizmo, you aren't the first or the last to want to race a Murena and I agree that the Murena has race car potential, and it's fair enough to exploit it! IMO that's a fair use for even a running and well kept Murena. Of course there's the risk of blowing up the engine, or smashing the front off on a tree, but sadly that's also a risk on the road.

I can't help you on which model would be the best to base your car on - they aren't that different, really. Even the trailing arms have the same geometries - the 2.2 just have the wheels wider apart. There's no adjustment possibilities on the rear end except spring rates, so camber stays as it is, but static camber can be set by changing ride height/springs. And then you can play with the anti-roll torsion bar.

A swedish guy thought about ways to get around this, but it won't be easy and probably not even necessary.

The front end has adjustable camber.

One thing you'd want to keep (if you can) is the torsion bars of the front suspension. They are a bit too soft for track use, but the whole thing is really designed around them.

Guys, I need to share this photo (it's a press photo) - and the purists will cry. It's a Renault Alpine, not a Matra - but it could have been!

In short I hope to produce a car that the murena would have become had it stayed in production.

The end of production had another reason... When Matra prepaired multispace vehicule on the Solara chassis, Peugeot said that nobody will buy that car, and because of it, that they won't put money into the project. The same said Citroen (both PSA owners of Simca resp.Talbot), so Matra asked Renault. And Renault said: well, we will put our money into this project but only if You stop production of Murena, and Matra did. That multispace car was than named Renault Espace and as we all know - nobody bought this car I think that Murena was pretty hard concurence against rear engined Alpine A310, and Renault was affraid that one day Talbot will put its V6 from Tagora SX into the Murena and that will be the last day for Alpine A310...

BTW: last weekend, we had our national Simca/Talbot/Matra meeting, and I was there with my Murena S and my father drove my Tagora V6 SX, and guys... the Tagora with this brutal engine is as fast as the Murena!!! And all drivers of new cars we passed over was watching Tagora with open mouths

Cheers Gismo! Seem to me that you headed straight into an already ongoing discussion about what, and in particular what NOT to do to a Murena.Thus you mentioning 450hp and high boost levels in your first post , might have given some people a wrong first impression , and brought the hideous pictures of German Murena Ferraris back to mind As I wrote my post here, I also had the pictures of a Dutch build Saab turbo Murena racer in my mind.. witch I must say went a bit too far for my taste.

Anyway.. I was actually going to add to my previous post, that one redeeming circumstance about such a project might be (as it seems is often the case) if the car in question was already written off, and found behind a barn by some resourceful enthusiast willing to make something out of it

As things are the people here have very different opinions as to what’s within the spirit of Matra to do with the Murenas.I for one am no purist. I can see why owners of true “S” Cars would consider ANY modification of their car as to intrusive, as these surely are very rare indeed.To me the line goes when something “irreversible” like cutting in the frame or doing massive plastic surgery to the body.. fitting pink leather seats and stuff like that.But as engine conversions go, I believe any 1.6 is fair game! , it will never get to go fast with the original engine, and the easy access, and rather straight forward conversion to the xu engines might be too much of a temptation for some.(keeping the engine in running order afterwards....indeed keeping it in one piece seem to much more of an issue) Various other “subtle “ modifications, like brake upgrades central locking etc are also quite fine by me.Where I get frustrated is when Murenas are mutilated (aliens again?) simply because they are too cheap to buy, and for some reason not “classic” enough to be respected as such.

As for the Alpine you posted Anders. They have been raced since the early days.. If I am not mistaken they were actually build for this very purpose ? .. further more, they are now precious enough to insure that “Injuries” like the one will quickly be mended and not spell the end for the cars.

Go for it Gizmo, all classic cars have their "improvers" and their "purists". I will always keep mine standard, except for a smaller steering wheel (for comfort and safety reasons obviously) but I can see a case for engine transplants etc.I think the ropey old Chrysler/Pug engine is part of the Murenas charm. It looks like an exotic supercar and has this old chugger of a motor.

I see you have a Volvo 480 turbo. I have just bought one of these, so if you have any hints or tips, about these cars, that you could share with me, then please PM me.